- MENU
- HOME
- SEARCH
- VIDEOS
- WORLD
- MAIN
- AFRICA
- ASIA
- BALKANS
- EUROPE
- LATIN AMERICA
- MIDDLE EAST
- United Kingdom
- United States
- Argentina
- Australia
- Austria
- Benelux
- Brazil
- Canada
- China
- France
- Germany
- Greece
- Hungary
- India
- Indonesia
- Ireland
- Israel
- Italy
- Japan
- Korea
- Mexico
- New Zealand
- Pakistan
- Philippines
- Poland
- Russia
- South Africa
- Spain
- Taiwan
- Turkey
- USA
- BUSINESS
- WEALTH
- STOCKS
- TECH
- HEALTH
- LIFESTYLE
- ENTERTAINMENT
- SPORTS
- RSS
- iHaveNet.com: Economy
by Jessica Rettig
The world must face a glaring fact: Demand for energy is growing, and countries need to expand their energy sources if they want to keep up. The Obama administration made a commitment to clean energy. But here's a source-by-source look at nine types of energy that could change the landscape in the United States.
OIL
Claim: Global demand for oil has reached its peak.
Reality: According to the
With demand growing, the concept of "peak oil"--the theory that the world's supply of accessible oil will reach a high point and then begin to decline--has many people worried and uncertain about oil's prospects. According to Gary Long, the
COAL
Claim: Carbon capture and storage technologies will make coal a nearly zero-emissions energy source.
Reality: Coal-fired power plants add more carbon dioxide to the atmosphere than any other energy source in the United States, and they provide more than half of the nation's electricity. President Obama has devoted $4 billion to new clean coal technologies, specifically carbon capture and storage, or CCS, with the hope of making the source nearly emissions free. CCS is a process by which carbon dioxide is separated from the production process and stored beneath Earth's surface. Experts say this technology is years, even decades, away from widespread commercial viability, but one project shows promise.
In September 2009,
NATURAL GAS
Claim: Natural gas can replace gasoline for use in vehicles.
Reality: This idea, most recently promoted by businessman T. Boone Pickens, seems ideal in theory. There's already plenty of natural gas in the United States, natural gas is cheaper than petroleum fuels, and it's reportedly much better for the environment, producing at least 20 percent less in emissions than diesel or gasoline. But the claim is a far reach, given that as of 2008, fewer than 1 percent of the vehicles in the United States use natural gas as a primary fuel.
Efficient natural gas vehicles have been around since the 1990s, so the problem is not the technology but rather the availability of fueling stations and the manufacture of cars. With few people driving natural gas vehicles, fueling stations are less eager to carry natural gas, but nobody wants to drive one if there's no place to fill the tank. Pickens, backed by Democratic Sen. Harry Reid, has proposed an initiative to invest in natural gas fueling stations; experts say changing the minds of American drivers and car manufacturers may take more time.
SOLAR
Claim: The cost of solar energy in America will be on par with traditional energy sources by 2015.
Reality: Though the solar industry has expanded almost 35 percent over the past five years and the past two years have seen nearly a 50 percent drop in the price of solar photovoltaics, the cost still raises doubts about the industry's ability to widely penetrate the power market. Nevertheless, the
Even if the long-term costs of solar energy drop, the upfront expenses, such as installation in the home, create an unlevel playing field to compete with oil and coal, which carry no upfront investment for the consumer, says Mark Sinclair, vice president of the
WIND
Claim: Wind energy could generate 20 percent of the power needed in the United States by 2030.
Reality: As of December, wind accounted for only 1.9 percent of the country's energy consumption. Yet in May 2008, the
The good news for wind power is that the rates of installation are already higher than had been predicted, and the United States is adding wind systems more quickly than any other country in the world. In 2008, the United States topped the list with an addition of more than 8,500 megawatts, or enough to serve over 2 million homes. In 2009, the rates increased to 10,000 MW for the year, which many people attribute to financing that was included in the stimulus bill. Still, because of job losses in the manufacturing sector and reduced private investment, experts worry that the industry won't keep pace for 2030.
NUCLEAR
Claim: The United States will rely more on nuclear power in the future.
Reality: As of last May, power from nuclear fission accounted for 19.4 percent of the nation's total energy, according to the
Obama recently committed $8.33 billion in loan guarantees for the construction of two new reactors at the Alvin W. Vogtle Electric Generating Plant in Georgia, which will provide electricity to 1.4 million people by 2017. The money Obama pledged came from the Energy Act of 2005, which set aside $18.5 billion in loan guarantees for nuclear plants. DOE has requested $36 billion more, according to Ebony Meeks, a DOE representative. Meeks says that without economic guarantees, more of these large-scale projects will be very difficult to get off the ground. Not to mention, each project must pass through the red tape of the
FUSION
Claim: There will be a functioning nuclear fusion plant by 2020.
Reality: Fusion technology, which will essentially harness the same type of energy found in stars by fusing the nuclei of two atoms, is still in development. Scientists have already conducted fusion reactions; they just require more energy to produce than they currently emit. A number of research groups around the world are working to develop the would-be revolutionary technology that could power whole cities using hydrogen from water, an unlimited source without harmful chemical emissions.
The National Ignition Facility at the
HYDROGEN
Claim: Fuel cell vehicles are the future of transportation.
Reality: In 2003, President Bush announced a $1.2 billion initiative for hydrogen fuel cell technology, touting the future of "the hydrogen economy" for the auto industry. Yet last May, with other green auto technologies advancing more quickly and becoming more economically feasible in the short term, the Obama administration cut research into fuel cell vehicles from its budget. Car manufacturers are continuing to develop the technology despite the setback in funding.
The problem with hydrogen fuel cell technology is that hydrogen, while one of the most common elements on Earth, does not exist alone in nature. The majority of hydrogen is now derived from natural gas, the rest from water. Yet the process of obtaining hydrogen, an energy carrier rather than a source, requires significant energy input itself, and a more efficient production process will be necessary to reduce both costs and environmental effects. In addition, though prototypes of hydrogen-powered autos such as Chevrolet's Equinox have performed successfully, issues with storing and distributing hydrogen pose problems for the widespread use of the technology.
WAVE
Claim: Wave power from America's shores can fill up to 6.5 percent of national energy demand.
Reality: Wave power was officially redefined as a renewable energy source in 2005, but prior to that, the technology's funding took second place to more popular energy sources, like wind and solar. Since 2005, with somewhat more money heading in its direction, the wave power industry has moved forward. However, wave power technologies are still in the research stage, and no commercial-scale wave energy project exists in the country (story, Page 50).
Roger Bedard from the
Available at Amazon.com:
WORLD | AFRICA | ASIA | EUROPE | LATIN AMERICA | MIDDLE EAST | UNITED STATES | ECONOMY | EDUCATION | ENVIRONMENT | FOREIGN POLICY | POLITICS
Reality Check: Energy Powers That Be | Jessica Rettig